Statement of the Technical Field
The inventive arrangements relate to recoil absorbing mechanism. More particularly, the inventive arrangements concern recoil absorbing mechanisms useful with Recoil Producing Devices (“RPDs”), such as energetic disruptors.
Description of the Related Art
There are various robotic platforms known in the art that comprise energetic disruptors (e.g., water jet disruptors) for inspecting and rendering threatening items (e.g., bombs) safe. Such robotic platforms are employed in various applications. Conventionally, robotic platforms have been used by police, bomb squads, and military personnel. Use of conventional energetic disruptors is difficult.
In some cases, the deployment platform comprises a tripod-like assembly which needs to be manually placed near a suspicious item, whereby the operator is placed in harm's way. The tripod-like assembly has a limited set of firing locations and elevations.
In other cases, the robotic platform comprises a movable arm to which the energetic disruptor is fixedly attached at a given location thereon. The movable arm does allow the energetic disruptor to be easily repositioned and aimed. However, the movable arm is over designed for all other applications of use thereof because it has to be strong enough to withstand the brief, high impulse load applied thereto when the energetic disruptor is shot. In effect, the robot is undesirably heavy and bulky. Also, the disruptor is attached to the movable arm so as to have a fixed position adjacent to a distal end thereof. In effect, the disruptor may interfere with other operations in which the movable arm is being employed. Additionally, the energetic disruptor applies a relatively high impulse load to the movable arm when shot. The high impulse load may cause damage to the movable arm.
In yet other cases, the disruptor is mounted to a robotic arm with a recoil absorber. The recoil absorber does decrease the impulse load on the robot. However, the conventional recoil absorber designs are long and bulky. The amount of stroke in the conventional recoil absorber designs is relatively small in comparison to the overall bulk of the device. A lot of times, the robotic arm comprises a gripper at a distal end thereof. The disruptor may interfere with gripper operations and/or damage the gripper when shot.
One conventional recoil absorber comprises a coil spring and damper. The damper is necessary to even out the shock load and dissipate energy. The issue with the spring/damper design is that: the damper adds an undesirable amount of weight and bulk to the design; and the design has a poor length ratio between the stroke length of the recoil absorber and the total length of the recoil absorber.